LEONCIO SY, EDWARD SY, DOREEN SY, EDMUND SY, AND EDGARD SY, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, VS. FLORENCIA DAYONDON, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
LAGURA-YAP, J.:
On August 23, 2013, the Judicial Records Division (CA-JRD) made a report[2] that no compliance was filed by the defendant-appellant as per Civil docket entry.
Under Rule 17 of the Rules of Court, Section 3. Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff, which reads:
Sec. 3. Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff.- if, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff fails to appear on the date of the presentation of his evidence in chief on the complaint, or to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time, or to comply with thes Rules or any order of the court, the complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the defendant or upon the court’s own motion, without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in the same or in a separate action. This dismissal shall have the effect of an adjudication upon the merits, unless otherwise declared by the court.(emphasis supplied)
Likewise, under Rule 50 of the Rules of Court, Section 1. Ground for dismissal of appeal. – An appeal may be dismissed by the Court of Appeals, on its own motion or on that of the appellee, on the following grounds.
xxx xxx xxx(g) Failure of the appellant to take the necessary steps for the correction or completion of the record within the time limited by the court in its order;
From the foregoing provision, the rule is clear that failure of the defendant-appellant to comply with the directive of the court without justifiable cause, the appeal my be dismissed by the Court of Appeals. Records show that this Court issued a Resolution dated January 17, 2013 and was received on March 5, 20133, directing the parties to complete the records and to cause the appearance of her counsel within ten (10) days from notice hereof but still despite the lapse of a reasonable period of time defendant-appellant have failed to comply with the directive in the Resolution, per the report4 dated August 23, 2013 of the Judicial Records Division (CA-JRD).
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, pursuant to Section 3, Rule 17 and Section 1(g), Rule 50 of the Revised Rules of Court, the appeal filed by defendant-appellant is hereby DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
Lagura-Yap, and *Quijano-Padilla, JJ., concur.
* Acting Junior Member per Office Order No. 472-13-ABR dated December 12, 2013.
[1] Rollo, pages 24-25.
[2] Rollo, dorsal portion of page 55.
[3] Rollo, dorsal portion of page 23.
[4] Rollo, dorsal portion of page 45.